Is Probabilistic Bias Analysis Approximately Bayesian?
- 1 January 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Epidemiology
- Vol. 23 (1) , 151-158
Abstract
Case-control studies are particularly susceptible to differential exposure misclassification when exposure status is determined following incident case status. Probabilistic bias analysis methods have been developed as ways to adjust standard effect estimates based on the sensitivity and specificity of exposure misclassification. The iterative sampling method advocated in probabilistic bias analysis bears a distinct resemblance to a Bayesian adjustment; however, it is not identical. Furthermore, without a formal theoretical framework (Bayesian or frequentist), the results of a probabilistic bias analysis remain somewhat difficult to interpret. We describe, both theoretically and empirically, the extent to which probabilistic bias analysis can be viewed as approximately Bayesian. Although the differences between probabilistic bias analysis and Bayesian approaches to misclassification can be substantial, these situations often involve unrealistic prior specifications and are relatively easy to detect. Outside of these special cases, probabilistic bias analysis and Bayesian approaches to exposure misclassification in case-control studies appear to perform equally well.Keywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Accounting for uncertainty about investigator bias: disclosure is informativeJournal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2009
- Relaxation Penalties and Priors for Plausible Modeling of Nonidentified Bias SourcesStatistical Science, 2009
- Bayesian Methods for Correcting MisclassificationEpidemiology, 2009
- Maternal Smoking and Environmental Tobacco Smoke Exposure and the Risk of Orofacial CleftsEpidemiology, 2007
- Sensitivity Analysis of Misclassification: A Graphical and a Bayesian ApproachAnnals of Epidemiology, 2006
- Self‐reported smoking, cotinine levels, and patterns of smoking in pregnancyPaediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 2005
- Monte Carlo Sensitivity Analysis and Bayesian Analysis of Smoking as an Unmeasured Confounder in a Study of Silica and Lung CancerAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2004
- Semi-Automated Sensitivity Analysis to Assess Systematic Errors in Observational DataEpidemiology, 2003
- Quantifying and Reporting Uncertainty from Systematic ErrorsEpidemiology, 2003
- Accuracy of self‐reported cigarette smoking among pregnant women in the 1990sPaediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 2001